Hemp In a Sane Society (2)

Wikipedia informs us that the custom of putting up a Christmas tree can be traced to 16th century Germany, though neither an inventor nor a single town can be identified as the sole origin for the tradition, which was a popular merging of older traditions; in the Cathedral of Strasbourg in 1539, the church record mentions the erection of a Christmas tree.

Back then the guilds started putting up Christmas trees in front of their guildhalls: a Bremen guild chronicle of 1570 reports how a small fir was decorated with apples, nuts, dates, pretzels and paper flowers, and erected in the guild-house, for the benefit of the guild members' children, who collected the dainties on Christmas day.

But, nuff of that bollocks…after all the Xmas tree is used to help the workers decorate their homes during the festival of the birth of the Christ-child, to help them numb the pain of their oppression. Whilst many will defend the growing of conifers for use during Xmas festivities, there is another “green tree” of sorts, which has had a bad press and which needs far more promotion by workers – a wee tree that has countless uses and benefits; one that could feed and clothe and help house millions of the world's poor and increase the standard of living for everyone., and which this blog has covered in the past. Just one snag, for various reasons, our masters oppose its mass cultivation. The following film explains…

Why is the massively valuable and versatile hemp plant illegal in the United States and indeed elsewhere? Three reasons. Making hemp illegal:

1. Provides make-work for a vast army of "law enforcers" who then are available to be used for other social control work

2. Protects the market share of numerous well organized lobbies: alcohol makers, plastics and chemical manufacturers, pharmaceutical companies, and cotton growers (still a powerful economic force in America 200 + years after the Civil War.)

3. Gives fascist minded politicians yet another way to control the population


Zombie Nation - mass neuro-toxicity

Two themes I often return to on this site are mind control and food adulteration. This video focuses on both. It commences with a Dr Russell Blaylock talking about the “chemical dumming down of society” to make people generally gullible, unable to think for themselves and dependent on governments and moves onto mass neuro-toxity via mercury poisoning and water fluoridation (a theme covered elsewhere on this site). The film also refers briefly to the work of Edward Bernays (again covered elsewhere on this site), a champion of water fluoridation.

Bernays helped the Aluminum Company of America (Alcoa) and other special interest groups to convince the American public that water fluoridation was safe and beneficial to human health. This was achieved by using the American Dental Association in a highly successful media campaign.

Call it conspiracy theory if you want, but if our leaders thought there were chemicals they could get us to ingest on a daily basis, chemicals that could indeed “dumb is down”, make us more manageable, do you think they would hesitate in using them?

The film cites a source I’m yet to confirm, although there are many references to it in cyber space. It suggests that the fluoridation of water was first introduced in nazi concentration camps and quotes a Charles Perkins, a chemist, who wrote the following to the Lee Foundation for Nutritional Research, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, on October 2nd 1954: 'in the 1930s, Hitler and the German Nazis envisioned a world to be dominated and controlled by a Nazi philosophy of pan-Germanism. The German chemists worked out a very ingenious and far-reaching plan of mass control, which was submitted to, and adopted by, the German General Staff. This plan was to control the population in any given area through mass medication of drinking water supplies. By this method they could control the population in whole areas, reduce population by water medication that would induce sterility in women and so on. In this scheme of mass control sodium fluoride occupied a prominent place.'Still with Bernays, these quotes from his 1928 book Propaganda show why he was so useful to the ruling elite of his day, and indeed right now.

Still with Bernays, these quotes from his 1928 book Propaganda show why he was so useful to the ruling elite of his day, and indeed right now.

The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country.

We are governed, our minds molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of. This is a logical result of the way in which our democratic society is organized. Vast numbers of human beings must cooperate in this manner if they are to live together as a smoothly functioning society.

Our invisible governors are, in many cases, unaware of the identity of their fellow members in the inner cabinet.

They govern us by their qualities of natural leadership, their ability to supply needed ideas and by their key position in the social structure. Whatever attitude one chooses toward this condition, it remains a fact that in almost every act of our daily lives, whether in the sphere of politics or business, in our social conduct or our ethical thinking, we are dominated by the relatively small number of persons-a trifling fraction of our hundred and twenty million-who understand the mental processes and social patterns of the masses. It is they who pull the wires which control the public mind, who harness old social forces and contrive new ways to bind and guide the world.

It is not usually realized how necessary these invisible governors are to the orderly functioning of our group life. In theory, every citizen may vote for whom he pleases. Our Constitution does not envisage political parties as part of the mechanism of government, and its framers seem not to have pictured to themselves the existence in our national politics of anything like the modern political machine. But the American voters soon found that without organization and direction their individual votes, cast, perhaps, for dozens of hundreds of candidates, would produce nothing but confusion. Invisible government, in the shape of rudimentary political parties, arose almost overnight. Ever since then we have agreed, for the sake of simplicity and practicality, that party machines should narrow down the field of choice to two candidates, or at most three or four.

In theory, every citizen makes up his mind on public questions and matters of private conduct. In practice, if all men had to study for themselves the abstruse economic, political, and ethical data involved in every question, they would find it impossible to come to a conclusion without anything. We have voluntarily agreed to let an invisible government sift the data and high-spot the outstanding issue so that our field of choice shall be narrowed to practical proportions. From our leaders and the media they use to reach the public, we accept the evidence and the demarcation of issues bearing upon public question; from some ethical teacher, be it a minister, a favorite essayist, or merely prevailing opinion, we accept a standardized code of social conduct to which we conform most of the time.

It might be better to have, instead of propaganda and special pleading, committees of wise men who would choose our rulers, dictate our conduct, private and public, and decide upon the best types of clothes for us to wear and the best kinds of food for us to eat. But we have chosen the opposite method, that of open competition. We must find a way to make free competition function with reasonable smoothness. To achieve this society has consented to permit free competition to be organized by leadership and propaganda.

Who are the men, who, without our realizing it, give us our ideas, tell us whom to admire and whom to despise, what to believe about the ownership of public utilities .. about immigration who tell us how our houses should be designed, what furniture we should put into them, what menus we should serve at our table, what kind of shirts we must wear, what sports we should indulge in, what plays we should see, what charities we should support, what pictures we should admire, what slang we should affect, what jokes we should laugh at?

A presidential candidate may be "drafted" in response to "around popular demand," but it is well known that his name may be decided upon by half a dozen men sitting L.. around a table in a hotel room.

A man buying a suit of clothe imagines that he is choosing, according to his taste and his personality, the kind of garment which he prefers. In reality, he may be obeying the orders of an anonymous gentleman tailor in
London. This personage is the silent partner in a modest tailoring establishment, which is patronized by gentlemen of fashion and princes of blood. He suggest to British noblemen and others a blue cloth instead of gray, two buttons instead of three, or sleeves a quarter of an inch narrower than last season. The distinguished customer approves of the idea.

But how does this fact affect John Smith of Topeka?

The gentleman tailor is under contract with a certain large American firm, which manufactures men's suits, to send them instantly the designs of the suits chosen by the leaders of LondonBoston, and Philadelphia wear them. And the Topeka fashion. Upon receiving the designs, with specifications as to color, weight, and texture, the firm immediately places an order with the cloth makers for several hundred thousand dollars' worth of cloth. The suits made up according to the specifications are then advertised as the latest fashion. The fashionable men in New York Chicago, man, recognizing this leadership, does the same.

Women are just as subject to the commands of invisible government as men. A silk manufacturer, seeking a new market for its product, suggested to a large manufacturer of shoes that women's shoes should be covered with silk to match their dresses. The idea was adopted and systematically propagandized. A popular actress was persuaded to wear the shoes. The fashion spread. The shoe firm was ready with the supply to meet thee created demand. And the silk company was ready with the silk for more shoes.

The new profession of public relations has grown up because of the increasing complexity of modern life and the consequent necessity for making the actions of one part of the public understandable to other sectors of the public. It is due, too, to the increasing dependence of organized power of all sorts upon public opinion. Governments, whether they are monarchical, constitutional, democratic or communist, depend upon acquiescent public opinion for the success of their efforts and, in fact, government is government only by virtue of public acquiescence. Industries, public utilities, educational movements, indeed all groups representing any concept or product, whether they are majority or minority ideas, succeed only because of approving public opinion. Public opinion is the unacknowledged partner in all broad efforts.

The public relations counsel, then, is the agent who, working with modern media of communications and the group formations of society, brings an idea to the consciousness of the public.

The systematic study of mass psychology revealed t7 students the potentialities of invisible government of society by manipulation of the motives which actuate man in the group. Trotter and Le Bon, who approached the subject in a scientific manner, and Graham Wallas, Walter Lippmann, and others who continued with searching studies of the group mind, established that the group has mental characteristics distinct from those of the individual, and is motivated by impulses and emotions which cannot be explained on the basis of what we know of individual psychology. So the question naturally arose. If we understand the mechanism and motives of the group mind, is it not possible to control and regiment the masses according to our will without their knowing about it?

If you can influence the leaders, either with or without their conscious cooperation, you automatically influence the group which they sway. But men do not need to be actually gathered together in a public meeting or in a street riot, to be subject to the influences of mass psychology. Because man is by nature gregarious he feels himself to be member of a herd, even when he is alone in his room with the curtains drawn. His mind retains the patterns which have been stamped on it by the group influences.


But when the example of the leader is not at hand and the herd must think for itself, it does so by means of clichés, pat words or images which stand for a whole group of ideas or experiences. Not many years ago, it was only necessary to tag a political candidate with the word interests to stampede millions of people into voting against him, because anything associated with "the interests" seemed necessary corrupt. Recently the word Bolshevik has performed a similar service for persons who wished to frighten the public away from a line of action.

By playing upon a old cliché, or manipulating a new one, the propagandist can sometimes swing a whole mass group emotions.

It is chiefly the psychologists of the
school of Freud( who have pointed out that many of man's thoughts and actions are compensatory substitutes for desires which has been obliged to suppress. A thing may be desired not for its intrinsic worth or usefulness, but because he has unconsciously come to see in it a symbol of something else, the desire for which he is ashamed to admit to himself. A man buying a car may think he wants it for purposes of locomotion, whereas the fact may be that he would really prefer not to be burdened with it, and would rather walk for the sake of his health. He may really want it because it is a symbol of social position, an evidence of his success in business, or a means of pleasing his wife.

This general principle, that men are very largely actuated by motives which they conceal from themselves, is as true of mass as of individual psychology. It is evident that the successful propagandist must understand the true motives and not be content to accept the reasons which men give for what they do.

Human desires are the steam which makes the social machine work. Only by understanding them can the propagandist control that vast, loose-jointed mechanism which is modern society.


... while, under the handicraft of small-unit system of production was that typical a century ago, demand created the supply, today supply must actively seek to create its corresponding demand. A single factory, potentially capable of supplying a whole continent with its particular product, cannot afford to wait until the public asks for its product; it must maintain constant touch, through advertising and propaganda, with the vast public in order to assure itself the continuous demand which alone will make its costly plant profitable. This entails a vastly more complex system of distribution than formerly.

No serious sociologist any longer believes that the voice of the people expresses any divine or specially wise and lofty idea. The voice of the people expresses the mind of 3 the people, and that mind is made up for it by the group leaders in whom it believes and by those persons who understand the manipulation of public opinion. It is composed of inherited prejudices and symbols and clichés and verbal formulas supplied to them by the leaders.

Fortunately, the sincere and gifted politician is able, by the instrument of propaganda, to mold and form the will of the people.

The political apathy of the average voter, of which we hear so much, is undoubtedly due to the fact that the politician does not know how to meet the conditions of the public mind. He cannot dramatize himself and his platform in terms which have real meaning to the public. Acting on the fallacy that the leader must slavishly follow, he deprives his campaign of all dramatic interest. An automaton cannot arouse the public interest. A leader, a fighter, a dictator, can. But, given our present political conditions under which every office seeker must cater to the vote of the masses, the only means by which the born leader can lead is the expert use of propaganda.

Whether in the problem of getting elected to office or in the problem of interpreting and popularizing new issues, or in the problem of making the day-to-day administration of public affairs a vital part of the community life, the use of propaganda, carefully adjusted to the mentality of the masses, is an essential adjunct of political life.

It is not necessary for the politician to be the slave to the public's group prejudices, if he can learn how to mold the mind of the voters in conformity with his own ideas of public welfare and public service. The important thing for the statesman of our age is not so much to know how to please the public, but know how to sway the public.

Good government can be sold to a community just as any other commodity can be sold.

One reason, perhaps, why the politician today is slow to take up methods which are a commonplace in business life is that he has such ready entry to the media of communication on which his power depends.

The newspaperman looks to him for news. And by his power of giving or withholding information the politician can often effectively censor political news. But being dependent, every day of the year and for year after year, upon certain politicians for news, the newspaper reporters are obliged to work in harmony with their news sources.

Propaganda is of no use to the politician unless he has something to say which the public, consciously or unconsciously, wants to hear.

The criticism is often made that propaganda tends make the President of the
United States so important that he becomes not the President but the embodiment of the idea of hero worship, not to say deity worship. I quite agree that this is so, but how are you going to stop a condition which accurately reflects the desires of a certain part of the public? The American people rightly sense the enormous importance of the executive's office. If the public tends to make of the President a heroic symbol of that power, that is not the fault of propaganda but lies in the very nature of the office and its relation to the people.



I've embedded this must-see film in the Socialist TV blog and, having just watched it for a second time, am convinced it needs a wider airing. This is one serious film - though if you’re squeamish keep away from it. I think our relationship with other earthlings is something socialists have never considered fully in their imaginings of a future society. Will we eat meat, fish? Will we wear leather? There are few better places to start that debate than by watching this important documentary

The website created to promote it says

EARTHLINGS is a feature length documentary about humanity's absolute dependence on animals (for pets, food, clothing, entertainment, and scientific research) but also illustrates our complete disrespect for these so-called "non-human providers." The film is narrated by Academy Award nominee Joaquin Phoenix (GLADIATOR) and features music by the critically acclaimed platinum artist Moby .

With an in-depth study into pet stores, puppy mills and animals shelters, as well as factory farms, the leather and fur trades, sports and entertainment industries, and finally the medical and scientific profession, EARTHLINGS uses hidden cameras and never before seen footage to chronicle the day-to-day practices of some of the largest industries in the world, all of which rely entirely on animals for profit. Powerful, informative and thought-provoking, EARTHLINGS is by far the most comprehensive documentary ever produced on the correlation between nature, animals, and human economic interests. There are many worthy animal rights films available, but this one transcends the setting. EARTHLINGS cries to be seen. Highly recommended!

EARTHLINGS has taken five years to produce. What began as a series of Public Service Announcements on spaying and neutering pets, evolved into a feature-length film on every major animal-related issue. Writer/Director Shaun Monson began the process by shooting footage at animal shelters in South Central L.A., Long Beach and North Hollywood. The PSAs were soon completed as his interest moved to other problem areas, like food and scientific research. In time, he accumulated a small library of material from several animal welfare organizations, and started editing. The process was a slow one. As footage gradually came in, Joaquin's narration was recorded (in stages), and a soundtrack was added. Along with all of Moby's music, some original pieces were also written for the film. In 2005, EARTHLINGS premiered at the Artivist Film Festival, (where it won Best Documentary Feature), followed by the Boston International Film Festival, (where it won the Best Content Award), and most recently at the San Diego Film Festival, (where it won Best Documentary Film, as well as the Humanitarian Award to Joaquin Phoenix for his work on the film).


Shoes hurled at Bush

My God, what on earth could have incensed this Iraqi journalist - Muntadar al-Zeidi - to hurl his shoes at the world's greatest defender of freedom and democracy, namely President George W Bush? Said Bush, moments later: "I dunno what the guy's cause is." Hmmm, maybe the 1.3 million dead Iraqis since Bush authorized an invasion of Iraq on behalf of US oil interests? Its a toughie. Jeez, some reporters are just so damned unappreciative

Nonchalantly, Bush said that all he knew was that it was a size 10. I also take a size 10 and have a penchant for Dr Marten boots, and I know I'd not have missed. Seriously though, how many people on this planet would have just loved to see that first shoe hit Bush straight in the mouth, dislodging a row of teeth and sending them hurtling down his throat.? That figure must run into at least 5 billions. Bush also said: "This doesn't represent the Iraqi people". What? Well...er...not if 10 million of them regret the shoe was not filled with dynamite, Mr Bush. A shoe in the mouth for this merchant of death and destruction? Nothing compared to what should be done to the gloopy, blood-soaked bastard.

The journalist screamed as he threw shoes: "This is a goodbye kiss from the Iraqi people, dog!! This is from the widows, orphans, and those killed in Iraq!"
No doubt this poor journalist will now be banged up for kissing Bush thus. I'd give the guy a medal and a horseshoe to throw next time. Meanwhile this and similar videos on Youtube will be the most viewed and shared in years (as I write, this one had 245 hits).


Bugger Christmas

They’re closing down Woolworths in Jarrow, indeed all over the country; sacking in excess of some 30,000 workers. The company has gone into administration, with debts of £385 million. Saturday gone, the Jarrow branch had a sale on – 50% off everything, so naturally the place was choc-a-block, with queues stretching all the way back to the River Tyne (I know, I exaggerate, but you get the picture). People stood in the queue with their arms full, looking impatient and frustrated. Christmas only weeks away and these poor workers here looked sick of their lives, all of them hoping they can get through this period of unfettered, wallet-emptying consumerism with their sanity in tact.

The usual thing round here, bar the credit cards and the loan from the DWP social fund (that is if you’re on income support, otherwise you can fuck off and apply for a crisis loan, in which case they’ll tell you ever louder to “fuck off”) is the Provident loan. They give their loans to anyone, no questions asked and the interest rate is a staggering 68%. I know parents who have taken out a loan from the social fund as well as the “provi” loan. The former is interest-free and is deducted from your benefits at source. The two together amount to a hefty millstone when you’re struggling to survive on benefits.

So, if you’re on state benefits, it’s like your whole year centres on Xmas day, if not preparing for it then paying for it and having to do without essentials just to meet the loan agreements. You get your loans out just before Xmas and 50 weeks later you’re still paying them off and doing without other essentials throughout that period. I jest not – for many families, Jesus Christ, or rather what takes place in his name, has them skint year in, year out. I know parents who quite literally dread this time of year, who curse its approach. Do they know it’s Christmas? as Bob Geldof and friends once sang? Too fucking right they do – they pay for it every day of their adult lives.

And how this wonderful consumer society serves the poor; forever exposing the emptiness of our lives and kindly providing the means by which our lives can be enriched, provi
ng that we too can enjoy happiness over Christmas, just like the well-to-dos. As the Citizen Advice Bureau has found, interest on this ‘happiness’ can rise to as much as 1800 per cent a year – a happiness that’s cheap at half the price…eh?

And just where the fuck would we be without the advertising industry who continually alert us to needs we never even knew we had and who constantly remind us that our lives are really less satisfactory than we had hitherto imagined? I looked through an electrical store recently and was amazed to find items I honestly never even knew existed. Jeez, where’ve I been this last year? Thank God for PSPs, Nintendos, ipods, male face creams and the myriad gadgets we have amazingly managed to live without for 2 million years. Just how the fuck did our species survive without them? Sheesh! Consider this - according to the Worldwatch Institute, we have used more goods and services since 1960 than in all the rest of human history! Have all of these pleasure-inducing goods contributed to a general human happiness? No, over the same period, 25-year-olds in Britain have become ten times more likely to be afflicted by depression. The WHO recently estimated that by the end of the decade depression will be the second commonest disease in the developed world.

The unrelenting onslaught of advertising exerts constant press
ure on parents in particular who, fearful their kids will be labelled, belittled and humiliated if their pressies are not up to scratch when they compare notes in the school yard, are more than ready to satisfy the most outlandish wants and bugger the cost and inconvenience for the next 52 weeks. To hell if that present you’ve just paid £250 for will end up in a cupboard after a few weeks, the novelty having worn off to be sold for £50 on ebay in a few months time – you just can’t let the neighbours know your hard up.

And the sad thing is, we all know Christmas marketing is j
ust one big profit-oriented scam, benefiting manufacturers, stores, and huge corporations, while driving individuals into debt. We all know it’s a game of winners and losers. You don’t need a degree in ethics to realise that the Chrimbo "wish lists" and "gift exchanges", the giving in que demeans the real concept of giving. We know this annual orgy of consumption – 40% of what we buy is binned, unused – is detrimental to the environment, filling landfills with useless packaging and discarded gifts. We know Christmas means misery for millions of families, depression for hundreds of thousands – the Samaritans say they receive an 8% increase in calls between Christmas day and New Year. Yet still we tag along with the damned charade, still we passively acquiesce in the madness. Even socialists take it seriously, for fuck’s sake. I know SPGB members, my comrades, who actually send out the conventional Christmas cards.

Seems the workers just need this annual fix, this distraction from the rat race, even if they do know its all bollocks

Me, as ever I’m pissed off with the unified bleatings of friends, family and associates, who mockingly call me "Scrooge" when I fail to fully endorse their ritual orgy of consum
ption or utter the hackneyed “are you set for Christmas yet?” type of remark. For I’m one of those dole wallahs with kids and grandkids, a single-parent to boot, who can say “Jesus Christ has got me skint.” And being a devout atheist, a Marxist, it smarts just that little bit more when you know you have to fucking conform – and phone up the ‘provi woman’ - just to save your kin humiliation.

So forgive me if you hear me say “Fuck Christmas! Stick yer Christmas tree up yer arse and put a match to that wee straw-filled manger.” To be sure, the class war is not suspended at Christmas as the religiously devout and profit mongers would have us believe. Indeed, the shameless robbery of our class is only accentuated when there are profits to be had.

If you’re looking for that anti-Xmas card, make your own like I do and use these pics below, courtesy of class warfare. Click to enlarge. Happy solstice :-)


Hemp in a Sane Society

Any socialist will tell you of the insanity of modern production, of the great barrier to commonsensical productive methods and the use of natural resources in the service of humanity - namely profit - and of planned obsolescence and waste. One thing the establishment of world socialism will usher in is environmentally sustainable resources and eco-friendly productive processes and within a system in which the artificial barriers to production have been removed. And one natural resource that will undoubtedly be widely cultivated for the use of humanity is hemp. Hemp is a weed – most commonly associated perhaps with marijuana – but it has tens of thousands of uses. Watch, if you will these videos below.

Imagine a building material that is stronger than cement yet SIX TIMES lighter? Better yet, one of its key ingredients is the waste product of a plant that literally grows like a weed and is 100% environmentally safe and friendly – hemp. Well, Big Brother says we can't have it - because it's "dangerous to society."

The manufacture of traditional cement is incredibly energy intensive, so much so that many cement companies seek and receive legal variances to not only burn coal, but also medical waste and used automobile tires as fuel for their kilns.

After oil refineries and chemical plants, cement factories are the most polluting factories in the world, spewing tons of micro-particles containing toxins like arsenic and mercury into the air.

To be sure, the mass growing of hemp in no way implies that workers everywhere will be stoned all day long. Industrial hemp contains less than 1% of THC the psychoactive component of marijuana. So, trying to get high on industrial hemp is akin to trying to get drunk on Irn Bru.

Hemp is the world's strongest natural fibre. It has been used to make cloth and rope for over 10,000 years. Hemp was the first crop ever cultivated for textile production.

Hemp cloth is stronger, longer lasting, more resistant to mildew, and cheaper to produce than cloth made of cotton. Hemp ropes are known for their strength and durability. The original Levi Strauss jeans were made from a hempen canvas

In 1941 the Ford motor company produced an experimental automobile with a plastic body composed of 70% cellulose fibres from hemp. The car body could absorb blows 10 times as great as steel without denting. The car was designed to run on hemp fuel. Because of the ban on both hemp and alcohol the car was never mass produced.

Then hemp production started to impinge on other people’s profits and the big money people struck out to protect their interests. Newspaper publisher William Randolph Hearst led the crusade to ban hemp. Hearst owned millions of acres of prime timber land and a machine that simplified the process of making paper from hemp had just been invented. Hearst used his power as a publisher to create public panic about the evils of hemp and marijuana. Another big money player Pierre DuPont held patent rights to the sulfuric acid wood pulp paper process. In 1937 DuPont patented nylon rope made from synthetic petrochemicals. Along with Duponts backer Treasury Secretary Andrew Mellon the big money people prevailed and near the end of 1937 Congress passed the Marijuana Tax Act. By placing a prohibitively high tax on hemp production it destroyed the industry. This was done to protect these big money interests of the timber, petrochemical, and cotton industries. Hemp was briefly re-legalized during W.W.II. The U.S. government produced the movie Hemp for Victory to encourage farmers to grow hemp.

Industrial hemp can replace cotton. Cotton is typically grown with large amounts of chemicals that are harmful to people, wildlife and the entire environment. Close to 50% of all the world's pesticides are sprayed on cotton. Hemp grows well in a wide variety of climates and soils. It requires far less fertilizer and pesticides than most commercial crops.

All parts of the hemp plant are useful. Hemp can be used to produce everything from fuel to soap. The oil from hemp seeds has the highest percentage of essential fatty acids and the lowest percentage of saturated fats.

Industrial hemp can yield 3-8 dry tons of fibre per acre. This is four times what an average forest can yield. It can replace wood fiber and help save our forests. Trees take approximately 20 years to mature - hemp takes 4 months. Paper made from hemp lasts for centuries, compared to 25-80 years for paper made from wood pulp.

Moreover, hemp is the perfect source for fuel. It produces more biomass than any other plant. It further can be used as a highly nutritious food source and in the production of medicines.

Needless to say, at the moment the mass cultivation of hemp, though it makes sound commonsense and helps solve a hundred human needs, will be opposed because it interferes with powerful interests. But fear not; the master class will not have it their own way forever. Socialism and the mass cultivation of hemp is on the cards as soon as the workers wake up and organise. And if the master class want to battle it out for the future of the planet, I'm sure we can find a first use for that hemp-based rope - nooses to hang the buggers with.


Advance copy of Identity

A friend on the "inside" copied me this. Click image to enlarge.


BNP finally come clean in Voice of Freedom

Click on image to enlarge

As referred to above, here is the Young, Nazi and Proud video. The ending, where Mr Collett is confronted with remarks that he made earlier in the programme, is classic - rather reminds me of something Omar Khayyam wrote: 'The moving finger writes; and, having writ moves on; nor all your piety nor wit shall lure it back or cancel half a line. Nor all your tears wash out a word of it.' Way to go, you Nazi bastard!